https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313259 The SC dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the lower courts, which denied the landlord's eviction application under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent And Eviction) Act, 1973. The Court emphasized the necessity of correctly identifying the tenant and following statutory procedures, rejecting the landlord's argument for eviction based on non-payment of rent by an incorrectly named tenant. The judgment underscored that relief cannot be granted if it prejudices the other party's rights, and proper impleading of parties is crucial in eviction proceedings. No order as to costs was made. en-us Fri, 30 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Apr 2024 15:45:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313259 The SC dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the lower courts, which denied the landlord's eviction application under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent And Eviction) Act, 1973. The Court emphasized the necessity of correctly identifying the tenant and following statutory procedures, rejecting the landlord's argument for eviction based on non-payment of rent by an incorrectly named tenant. The judgment underscored that relief cannot be granted if it prejudices the other party's rights, and proper impleading of parties is crucial in eviction proceedings. No order as to costs was made. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313259